A financial instrument trading system, such as a futures exchange, referred to herein also as an “Exchange”, such as the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (CME), provides a contract market where financial instruments, for example futures, options on futures and spread contracts, are traded among market participants, e.g. traders, brokers, etc. Futures is a term used to designate all contracts for the purchase or sale of financial instruments or physical commodities for future delivery or cash settlement, and which are traded on a commodity futures exchange. A futures contract is a standardized legally binding agreement to buy (long) or sell (short) a commodity or financial instrument at a specified price at a predetermined future time. An option is the right, but not the obligation, to sell (put) or buy (call) the underlying instrument (for example, a futures contract) at a specified price within a specified time. The commodity or instrument to be delivered in fulfillment of the contract, or alternatively the commodity, instrument or reference for which the cash market price shall determine the final settlement price of the futures contract, is known as the contract's “underlying” reference, instrument or commodity, also referred to as the “underlier.” The terms and conditions of each futures contract are standardized as to the specification of the contract's underlier, the quality and quantity of such underlier, delivery date, and means of contract settlement, i.e. physical delivery or cash settlement. Cash Settlement is a method of settling a futures contract whereby the parties effect final settlement when the contract expires by paying/receiving the pecuniary loss/gain of the contract, e.g. by comparing the contract price to the market price or other reference price of the underlier at the time of settlement, related to the contract in cash, rather than by effecting physical delivery, i.e. the actual exchange of the underlying reference or commodity at a price determined by the futures contract.
Typically, the Exchange provides for centralized “clearing” by which all trades are confirmed and matched, and open positions are settled each day until expired (such as in the case of an option), offset or delivered. Matching, which is a function typically performed by the Exchange, is a process, for a given order which specifies a desire to buy or sell a quantity of a particular instrument at a particular price, of seeking/identifying one or more wholly or partially, with respect to quantity, satisfying counter orders thereto, e.g. a sell counter to an order to buy, or vice versa, for the same instrument at the same, or sometimes better, price (but not necessarily the same quantity), which are then paired for execution to complete a trade between the respective market participants (via the Exchange) and at least partially satisfy the desired quantity of one or both of the order and/or the counter order, with any residual unsatisfied quantity left to await another suitable counter order, referred to as “resting.”
A “Clearing House,” which is typically an adjunct to the Exchange and may be an operating division thereof, is responsible for settling trading accounts, clearing trades, collecting and maintaining performance bond funds, regulating delivery, and reporting trading data to market regulators and to the market participants. An essential role of the clearing house is to mitigate credit risk via the clearing process. Clearing is the procedure through which the Clearing House becomes buyer to each seller of a futures contract, and seller to each buyer, also referred to as a “novation,” and assumes responsibility for protecting buyers and sellers from financial loss due to breach of contract, by assuring performance on each contract. A clearing member is a firm qualified to clear trades through the Clearing House.
Current financial instrument trading systems allow traders to submit orders and receive confirmations, market data, and other information electronically via a communications network. These “electronic” marketplaces, implemented by, and also referred to as, “electronic trading systems,” are an alternative trading forum to pit based trading systems whereby the traders, or their representatives, all physically stand in a designated location, i.e. a trading pit, and trade with each other via oral and visual/hand based communication.
In particular, electronic trading of financial instruments, such as futures contracts, is conducted by market participants sending orders, such as to buy or sell one or more futures contracts, in electronic form to the Exchange. These electronically submitted orders to buy and sell are then matched, if possible, by the Exchange, i.e. by the Exchange's matching engine, to execute a trade. Outstanding (unmatched, wholly unsatisfied/unfilled or partially satisfied/filled) orders are maintained in one or more data structures or databases referred to as “order books,” such orders being referred to as “resting,” and made visible, i.e., their availability for trading is advertised, to the market participants through electronic notifications/broadcasts, referred to as market data feeds. An order book is typically maintained for each product, e.g. instrument, traded on the electronic trading system and generally defines or otherwise represents the state of the market for that product, i.e. the current prices at which the market participants are willing buy or sell that product. As such, as used herein, an order book for a product may also be referred to as a market for that product.
A market data feed, referred to as market data or market feed, is a compressed or uncompressed real time (with respect to market events), or substantial approximation thereof, data/message stream provided by the Exchange directly, or via a third party intermediary. A market data feed may be comprised of individual messages, each comprising one or more packets or datagrams, and may carry, for example, pricing or other information regarding orders placed, traded instruments and other market information, such as summary values and statistical values, or combinations thereof, and may be transmitted, e.g. multi-casted, to the market participants using standardized protocols, such as UDP over Ethernet. More than one market data feed, each, for example, carrying different information, may be provided. The standard protocol that is typically utilized for the transmission of market data feeds is the Financial Information Exchange (FIX) protocol Adapted for Streaming (FAST), aka FIX/FAST, which is used by multiple exchanges to distribute their market data. Pricing information conveyed by the market data feed may include the prices, or changes thereto, of resting orders, prices at which particular orders were recently traded, or other information representative of the state of the market or changes therein. Separate, directed/private, messages may also be transmitted directly to market participants to confirm receipt of orders, cancellation of orders and otherwise provide acknowledgment or notification of matching and other events relevant, or otherwise privy, only to the particular market participant.
As may be perceived/experienced by the market participants from outside the Exchange or electronic trading system operated thereby, the following sequence describes how, at least in part, information may be propagated in such a system and how orders may be processed:                (1) An opportunity is created at a matching engine of the Exchange, such as by placing a recently received but unmatched order on the order book to rest;        (2) The matching engine creates an update reflecting the opportunity and sends it to a feed engine;        (3) The feed engine multicasts it to all of the market participants to advertise the opportunity to trade;        (4) The market participants evaluate the opportunity and each, upon completion of their evaluation, may or may not choose to respond with an order responsive to the resting order, i.e. counter to the resting order;        (5) The Exchange gateway receives any counter orders generated by the market participants, sends confirmation of receipt back directly to each submitting market participant, and forwards the received orders to the matching engine; and        (6) The matching engine evaluates the received orders and matches the first arriving order against the resting opportunity and a trade is executed.        
To gain and maintain the trust and confidence of market participants and encourage participation, electronic trading systems ideally attempt to offer a more efficient, fair and balanced market where market prices reflect a true consensus of the value of traded products among the market participants, and which minimize, if not eliminate, surreptitious or overt subversion, influence of, or manipulation by, any one or more market participants, intentional or otherwise, and unfair or inequitable advantages, with respect to access to information or opportunities. To accomplish these goals, for example, electronic trading systems should operate in a deterministic, i.e. a causal, predictable, or otherwise expected, manner as understood and experienced by the market participants, i.e. the customers of the Exchange. Electronic trading systems which implement markets which are overtly or covertly inefficient, unfair or inequitable risk not only losing the trust, along with the patronage, of market participants, but also increased regulatory scrutiny as well as potential criminal and/or civil liability.
Accordingly, the operators of electronic trading systems, alone or in conjunction with, or at the direction of, regulatory or industry organizations, typically publish or otherwise promulgate rules or regulations, referred to as business or operating rules, which govern the operation of the system. These rules define how, for example, multiple transactions are processed by the system where those transactions have relationships or dependencies there between which may affect the result of such processing. Such business rules may include, for example, order allocation rules, i.e. rules which dictate which of multiple competing resting orders will be matched with a particular incoming order counter thereto having insufficient quantity to fill all of the suitable resting orders. For example, under a first-in-first-out methodology, the first order, of the competing resting orders, that was received by the electronic trading system will be matched with the incoming counter-order and filled to the extent possible by the available quantity, with any residual quantity of the incoming counter order then being allocated to the next received suitable competing resting order and so on until the available quantity of the incoming counter order is exhausted. However, additional or alternative matching/allocation rules may be implemented as well, for example to ensure fair and equal access, improve trading opportunities, etc., by allocating, such as proportionally, the available quantity of the incoming counter order among all, or a subset, of the competing resting orders until the available quantity is exhausted.
Once such business rules are established, or modified, market participants will expect, and overseeing regulatory entities may require, that the electronic trading system operate in accordance therewith. That is, if the Exchange adopts a rule to give first arriving orders priority over later arriving orders, a market participant who submits an earlier arriving order will expect their order to be filled prior to a later arriving order submitted by another market participant. It will be appreciated that these rules, by which operators of an electronic trading system may choose to operate their system, may vary at the discretion of the operators, subject to regulatory concerns. Generally, the term “transactional determinism” may refer to the processing, or the appearance thereof, of orders in accordance with the defined business rules.
In addition to efficiency, fairness and equity, electronic trading systems further provide significant performance improvements allowing for rapid high volume transaction processing which benefits both the Exchange and market participants. Metrics of electronic trading system performance include latency and throughput. Latency may be measured as the response time of the Exchange. This can be measured in a number of different contexts: the time elapsed from when an order, or order cancellation, is received to when a confirmation/acknowledgment of receipt is transmitted, from when an order is received to when an execution notification is transmitted, or the time elapsed from when an order is received to information about that order being disseminated in the market data feed. Throughput may be measured as the maximum number of orders or trades per second that the electronic trading system can support, i.e. receive and acknowledge, receive and match, etc.
Generally, market participants desire rapid market data updates, low latency/high throughput order processing, and prompt confirmations of their instructions to allow them to: competitively, frequently and confidently evaluate, react to, and capitalize upon or, conversely, avoid, discrete, finite, fast moving/changing or ephemeral market events; leverage low return transactions via a high volume thereof; and/or otherwise coordinate, or synchronize their trading activities with other related concerns or activities, with less uncertainty with respect to their order status. Higher volume capacity and transaction processing performance provides these benefits as well as, without detrimentally affecting that capacity or performance, further improves market access and market liquidity, such as by allowing for participation by more market participants, the provision of additional financial products, and/or additional markets therefore, to meet the varying needs of the market participants, and rapid identification of additional explicit and implicit intra- and inter-market trading opportunities. The Exchange benefits, for example, from the increased transaction volume from which revenue is derived, e.g. via transaction fees.
Current electronic trading systems already offer significant performance advantages. However, increasing transaction volumes from an increasing number of market participants, implementation by some market participants of algorithmic and/or high frequency trading methodologies whereby high speed computers automatically monitor markets and react, usually in an overwhelming manner, to events, coupled with a continued demand for ever-decreasing processing latencies and response times, is driving a need for additional capacity and performance improvements to maintain performance as experienced by each market participant and avoid detrimental consequences, such as capacity exhaustion and inequitable access. For example, the increasing speed at which market participants may evaluate and respond to changes in market data, such as responsive to a market event, is increasing the rate at which transactions are received by the electronic trading system, narrowing the time of receipt gap there between and necessitating a need for a higher degree of discrimination so as to resolve the order in which those transactions are received, upon which the deterministic operation of the electronic trading system may be based, e.g. for order allocation, etc. Furthermore, the addition, by electronic trading systems, of additional channels of communication in an effort to increase capacity and opportunity, along with increased bandwidth of each channel, allows for more transactions to be submitted over multiple parallel paths into the system. Accordingly, not only must the electronic trading system discriminate among closely received incoming transactions, but must further arbitrate among transactions received simultaneously, or temporally so close together as to be considered simultaneously received, i.e. the difference in their time of receipt being to close to measure by the implemented discrimination mechanisms, also referred to as “substantially simultaneously”.
In addition to increased capacity and lower latency, the global nature of business has further driven a need for fault tolerance to increase availability and reliability of electronic trading systems. Scheduled outages must be minimized and unscheduled outages must be eliminated.
Furthermore, to implement the Exchange's clearing function, which mitigates the concerns of market participants relating to performance by counter parties, protects the interests of the Exchange and otherwise adequately manages/mitigates risk, risk management systems having corresponding operational efficiency and performance are needed so as to protect the Exchange from loss while minimizing impediments to market operations or distractions to market participants with ancillary and unnecessary tasks. In addition, increased transaction volume may further translate into greater exposure for market participants requiring greater amounts of capital to be posted to cover losses. Accordingly, more accurate and/or tailored risk assessment may be required to ensure that only the necessary minimum amount of capital is required to be allocated by the market participants to cover potential losses and avoid undue encumbrances on/impediments to the ability of those market participants to conduct their business.
Improved speed and efficiency also, unfortunately, improves the speed at which problems may occur and propagate, or otherwise be exploited, such as where the market ceases to operate as intended, i.e. the market no longer reflects a true consensus of the value of traded products among the market participants. Such problems are typically, but not always, evidenced by extreme market activity such as large changes in price, whether up or down, over a short period of time or an extreme volume of trades taking place. In particular, market participants, whether human or electronic, may not always react in a rational manner, such as when presented with imperfect information, when acting in fraudulent or otherwise unethical manner, and/or due to faulty training or design. For example, while communications technologies may have improved, inequities still exist in both access to information and access to opportunities to participate, which may not be due to any violations of legislative, regulatory and/or ethical rules, e.g. some traders receive information before other traders because they can afford faster communications channels, some traders may be able to place trade orders more quickly than others because they have faster computers. In many cases, irrational and/or exploitive trader behavior may be triggered by a market event, such as a change in price, creating a feedback loop where the initial irrational reaction may then cause further market events, such as continued price drops, triggering further responses and resulting in an extreme change in the price of the traded product in a short period of time. High speed trading exacerbates the problem as there may be little time for traders/algorithmic trading systems, or those overseeing them, to contemplate and temper their reactions before significant losses may be incurred. Furthermore, improved communications among traders facilitates exploitation of information inequities and propagation of irrational behavior in one market to other markets as traders in those other markets react to the results of the irrational behavior. Market protection systems may therefore be needed to monitor and evaluate trading activity, detect illegitimate/exploitive activity and appropriately react more quickly to mitigate the spread of problems, again with out impeding legitimate market operation.
Accordingly high performance electronic trading systems need to assure transactional determinism under increasing loads while providing improved trading opportunities, fault tolerance, low latency processing, high volume capacity, minimal impact risk mitigation and market protections, as well as equitable access to information and opportunities.